ML20212C412

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amends to Facility Operating licenses,NPF-9 & NPF-17,proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination & Opportunity for Hearing

ML20212C412
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	10/17/1997
From:	Nerses V NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212C417	List: ML20212C412
References
NUDOCS 9710290223
Download: ML20212C412 (8)

Text

s 7590-01 P UNITED STATES NUCl FAR REGULATORY CouulSalON DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION l

DOCKET NOS. 50 389 AND 50 370 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES PROPOBED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDB CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Rogalatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF 17 issued to Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee) for operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.

The proposed amendments would revise Technical Specification Table 3.34,

" Engineered. Safety Features [ESF) Actuation System instrument Trip Setpoints.' Specifically, the amendments would support the replacement of the three safety-related wide range level instruments. The ESF trip setpoint for the refueling water automatic switchover to recirculation would be revised to account for the difference in instrument uncertainty associated with wide range level instruments and provide additional operator response time margin.

Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission wil: have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (tne Act) and the Commission's regulations.

W"I88ai Pd8Fu, 9

FDR

s d

1 j _

The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request j

involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 1

l 50.g2, this means that operation of the facilNy in accordance with the proposed amendment i

would not (1) involve a significant incrosse in the probability or consequences of an accident j

previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any -

l-j accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As requirW by 10 CFR 50.g1(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

i First Standard Operation of the facility in accetonfme with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant increase in the probabWty or consequences of an accident previously i

evaluated, i

i i

Probability i

4 i

The FWST [ Refueling Water Storage Tank) and its asnociated instrumentation are not I

considered accident initiators. The instrumentation chenge is from a narrow range type instrument to a wide range type instrument. A failure of either type of instrument could.

i result in an undesired switchover or failure to switchover. However, the failure could not initiate any subsequent accident sequences.

l Consequences

- With the switchover to recirculation setpoint change, the system design will still provide enough injected water to ensure that the resctor remains shutdown, as well as provide sufficient water depth within the containment sump to ensure adequato not positive suction head (NPSH) for the ECCS [ emergency core cooling system) pump: and protect against vortexing. Also, adequate time is provided to ensure the completion of all operator actions necessary for switchover to cold leg recirculation prior to the loss of all usable FWST inventory and loss of suction to the ECCS pumps.

The change in the FWST LOW lovel setpoint reduces the FWST volum(

. is delivered to the primary system in the injection phase of a LOCA [ loss-of coclant

1 3

accident). Thus, this volume reduction affects the containment pressure responso during a LOCA. A reanalysis of the containment pressure response using the NRC-approvvd methodology of DPC NE 3004 demonstrates that the peal; containment pressure remains below the design limit for the proposed FWST LOW level setpoint.

The LOCA blcwdown, refill, and reflood phases of the analysis are not affected by the change in switchover setpoint. Therefore, the fuel clad integrity will not be impacted as a result of this change. The containment response was analyzed and found to be within acceptable limits. Therefore, the fission product barriers are unaffected by this change in setpoint.

The radiological calculations include assumptions regarding the start of ECCS recirculation which could be impacted by this change. The impact of the setpoint changes is to shorten the time that is assumed for ECCS recirculation to begin. This would tend to increase the calculated dose from this potentialleak path but the impact is so small that the currently reported results remained unchanged (calculation results are the same within roundoff, such that reported results do not change). The change does not significantly impact the radiological consequences of the design basis LOCA.

An analysis was performed at the FWST reduced borated water volume delivered to the primary system during a LOCA. The resulting primary systern boron concentrations were compared to boron concentrations required to keep the core suberitical and found to be acceptable.

Therefore, there is no increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously eva!uated.

Second Standard The amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previoualy evaluated, The failure modes of the new level transmitters remain the same. The instrumentation interacts with the same equipment and provides the same function. Therefore, failure of the new instrumentation (cannot) produce a new or different kind of accident previously evaluated. However, s'ome failure modes will be more readily detectable because of the change to wide range instrumentation.

Third Standard The amendment would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The change to the FWST instrumentation does not involve a reduction in the margin of safety. Although increased instrument uncertainty is being introduced, the FWST !ow level satpoint is being adjusted to compensate for this change. The overall analysis results continue to be bounded such that there is no loss of suction from the FWST prior

4 to ECCS pump switchover io the containment sump. There is adequate FV/ST Inventory injected to maintain the reactor shutdown. Thero is sufficient water depth within the containment sump to satisfy NPSH and vortex concems. In addition, the peak cMtainment pressure remains below the design limit for the proposed FWST LOW level setpoint.

The rate of injection and back pressure of the FWST is not affected by the setpoint I

change. Analysis shows that the peak cladding temperature occurs prior to ECCS pump switchover to the containment sump, and thus is unaffseted by this change.

i Therefore, the new Instrumentation and revised selpoints do not cause a reduction in the morpin of cafety associated with containment pressure or fuel cladding Integrity, The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.g2(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards d

consideration.

The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiratiors of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

1 4

-~

n ut e

m t-~ e

.s.

Written comments may be submKted ny n Jil to the Ch!ct, Rules and Directiws Danct.,

Division of Freedom of informsWn and Publiations Cen<lces, Offua of Administration, U.S.

Nucieat Rege. ate ry Cornn luon, Washhgton, DC 20555-0001, and u5ould 6te the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER ncCce. Writu enm,nents may also be delivvred to Rcnra SD22, Two Wrute Flint North.11f45 Rockyk Pike, Roed10, Marf and, l

from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Ccpies of writtan comrnents recebed may be examined at use NRC Public Dokumer.t Roarn, the Gelman Buildiap,2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC.

T The liling of requests far hearin2 and petitions for leave to intervene la discussed below.

By November 21,1997, the licensee may file a request for ::: necing v,ith respect to issuand of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any pvrson whose interest may be affected by tW proceeding and svhc wishen ta participate as a party in the proceocing must file a wt tten requent for a hearity and a petition for leave to intervene.

i Requasts for a hearing and a po0 tion ior leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice for Oomestic Licensir9 Proceedings"in 10 CFR Part 2.

interestes persons chould consult a curmat copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is availal;e at the Conwrdssion's Public Documt.it Room, the Gelman Buildir.g,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public documer.t room located at the J. Murrey Atkins Library, UniversPy of North Carolina at Charlotte,9201 (C Nersity City Boulevard, North Carolina. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervtas is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety gad ucensing Board, vesignated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and LicensWg Board Panel, will ru!e on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or K,e designated Atomic Svety scd Licensing Board willissue a notice of hearing or a appropriate order.

~-

i

.s.

As required oy 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leavMo intervens shd u forth with paitituiaftry tae laterest of the peliitoner in the proceeding, ard hciv that interest may be affected by the reaults of the orecoWing. Me petitien should specifically explain the reasor.s why interantiori shodd be permitted with partJcular reference to the fonowing factom: (1) the naisre of the petitioners Gght under t5r Act to ba inade pwty to the pTeee fing; (2) the nature

(

rno extern of the petitloders propertz, financial, or ott,er ir.terest in the prrceeding; and (3) the possible effect M kay order which may be entered in the procesc'ing on 'h9 petitionafs interest.

The petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to wh!'.:h petitioner wishes 19 intervene. Any person who has filed a petitien for leave to Intenas or who has beers adtdtted as a party may amend tiu pe' tion withod reque:tng leave i

of the Board up to 15 days prbr to the first preheadne conference echeduled in the prncaeding, but such an omtrded petition muet satisfy the specificity requirernents dewibed a%vo.

Not later than 15 days prior to tha flat pnehearing ccqforenne scheduled in the i

proceeding, a rtitioner shall file a suppiemers to the petitiori tr: Intervena which raust include a list of me contentions which are sought to be litigsdod in the matter. Each contentlots inust conrist of a specific satement or the issue of hw or fact to be raised or corttoverted. An addition, the petitlaner nheil protide a brief exc> nation of the bases of the contention and a evncise etatement of the alleged fach cr expert oN3on which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the ententica at the hearing. The putlthner taust i

7

.y q,

y

~'

~

w 7g also provida reference:. to those specific sources and drmments of which tim petit [oner is uy aware and on which its petitioner intende to re!y to establish thor.e fvcts or expert opinion.

5 Pentioner must pmvide sufficirrt information to ehow that a genuins d:spute exists with the c.>plicant ca a me'.erialissue of law or fad. Contentions shalt be limited to maMets within he scope of the arr endment ur der considaration. The contention raist be (n9 which, W prriven, would entitle the petitioner to relien A peti %ner who fs0s to fBo such e suppleme:6 which catisfies those requirements with respect to a'4 icast one conterF. ion d! not be permuted to partkipate at a par +y.

Those pennitted to intervenn become partias to the proceeding, rubject to any limitations in the ods get'iting icam to intervene, und have the opportunity to patilcipatc fully in tho conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine

witnesse, if a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of rro shnificant narards consderatior;. The % cal deteimination will serm to decide when the heaniaq ls held-If the finct determination is that the amendment rec,aest involves no signikant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment anc make it immediately effective, netwithstanding the request for s hearing. Any hearing hwd would tske placr ofterissuance of the amendment.

li the final determination is that the amendment requestinvolves a significarit hazards considerathn, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amehdment.

A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the C,ommission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC

.. - _.... -. ~.. -. -. -

... -.~... -. -. - -. - - -. - _. -

g 17, i

8.

[

1.

205% 0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the r

Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, I

L OC, by the above date. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisslor. Washington. DC 20555-0001, and to Mr. Albert k

Carr, Duke Energy Corpo,ation,422 South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28242, l

sttomey for the licensee.

Nont5ely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental l

petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the

(

Commission, the presiding officer or De presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in j.

10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 13,19g7, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document j

Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public i-document room located at the J. Murrey Atkins Library, University of North Carolina at.

Charlotte, g201 University City Boulevard, North Carolina.

i j

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this17ti lay oi October 1997, t

t j

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

M I

Victor Norses, Senior Project Manager i

Project Directorate ll-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/ll Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4

a n

--,r

_,